The revolution is not a next-gen console.. it's a +0.5 gen console. Almost by that definition it's got a lower lifespan than either the Xbox or PS3.
Why would anyone by the Revolution as a second console if they can just buy the controller for their existing console?!? The revolution will have games to begin with but if the controller is available for the other consoles than 3rd parties will have no trouble porting their games over.
Sony and Microsoft have plenty of time to see what happens with the controller and copy it if necessary. Hell, I would expect 3rd party controller makers to copy it pretty quickly.
The orginal playstation control did not have analog sticks. Sony sees the need (in response to Nintendo's N64 controller) and it becomes a wide success on that platform.
They're quick to defend the rights of an artist who has created something that some people find objectionable...provided that it's not a Christian nativity scene on someone's front lawn that non-Christians find objectionable.
Actually, the ACLU have defended many Christians (and others) who have been prevented from expressing their religion. That too is a civil liberty.
Unfortunately, you've been mislead that the ACLU is some religious hating organization -- that's patently false.
Time travel was used to good effect in Babylon 5. They even had part of the time travel arc in the 1st season and revisited it, in the other timeframe, in the 3rd(?) season.
That single instance of time travel was an essential element to the entire mythology of Babylon 5. StarTrek, of course, uses it as a cheap plot gimic.
Re:Why MySQL? create user foo createdb;
on
Beginning PHP and MySQL
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
From what I've seen, people who use MySQL rarely have a good understanding of even the fundamentals of normalization, joins (all types), the difference between WHERE and HAVING, etc. -- stored procedures, constraints, domains, triggers, etc. are just entirely lost on them. They might start to see some benefits to another server system when they run into the quirks of MySQL (and particularly its data-integrity issues, silent conversions, "transactions", etc.)
That's funny, I generally find the opposite. Because you don't have triggers (especially), constraints, etc you have to do better with your data normalization. I'm working on a SQL server project right now with little or no normalization but lots of triggers to sort it out. What a mess. You couldn't even do that with MySQL. I won't even get into the ugliness of 1500 stored procedures.
PHP5 does not lose the Bash-like advantages of the language.
For purely procedural code, PHP5 is EXACTLY the same as PHP4. The only changes have been in object-oriented side of things. And even most of those changes are optional.
Furthermore, the OO changes to PHP5 bring it in-line with other languages. Ultimately it should make it easier for developers familiar with OO programming to get into PHP.
You're forgetting the HP OmniGo line of organizers. Both the 100 and 120 ran GEOS. It also had Palm graffiti software. And it came out just before the first palm pilot.
It was a great little device with a keyboard and fold-around screen.
"I am concerned about long-term entrenched confusions such as referring to a version of our GNU OS as 'Linux' and thinking that our work on free software was motivated by the ideas associated with 'open source.' These confusions lead users away from the basic issue: their freedom. By comparison, the events involving SCO are transitory and almost trivial," Stallman says.
Get Miranda it's interface is similar to ICQ (but way less busy). It can import all your ICQ history and contacts. It's far less bloated. You can download sounds and icon sets to make look/feel exactly like ICQ (which is what I've done).
I also have the MSN plugin installed so I can chat with MSN people.
I was a hardcode ICQ user but Miranda is the ultimate replacement.
The Linux kernel is called Linux. It doesn't matter that it was edited in emacs and compiled with gcc. It's Linux.
The Linux kernel? You mean the kernel for the Linux operating system? You refer to Linux as an operating system (distribution) even while trying to point out that Linux is just the name of kernel.
RMS would like us to say the GNU kernel is called Linux. That's the way it should be but RMS doesn't want Linux to be kernel for GNU (they want HURD) so you can't even say that.
The performance increase between using exposed and hidden functions is minimal.
MySQL, for example, exposes a number of different functions with different performance characteristics. By using the functions directly, rather than going through an abstraction, I can guaruntee that I don't make extra unnecessary calls to the database. As it stands, my abstraction layer makes all those calls and I probably lose a bit of performance by doing that.
If you should want to write your own abstraction layer, it could be done on top of a common one.
A common DB abstraction layer is more complicated than you seem to think it is. I kinda like the fact that PHP developers work on PHP and everyone else works on the DB abstraction layer.
What I'm saying, is that the mix-matched-names are bad. VERY bad. They show no relationship to a higher level of commoonality. There's no common prepare_statement(databse_handle,statement) type structure.
MySQL has no concept of prepare_statement, what would you do in that case? The names of the functions are the actual names exposed by the underlying C client libraries. The Perl abstraction layer has to call these exact functions with their wierd names. Sure, it hides that from you. But that's just what PEAR::DB does.
Ok, layer is a word i use only because it should be seperated somehow.. perhaps i'll just use the word api. Fine, every DB vendor does things differently, but there is a LOT in common.
Perhaps. But PHP just exposes the DB vendors API. That's all. PEAR::DB and ADODB are the abstraction layers. It's just that in most languages that layer is hidden from you. In PHP it's available. It also means that the abstraction layers are written in PHP (which is a good thing)
So there are two reasons the DB vendors API's are exposed in PHP:
1) You can write your own DB abstraction layer.
2) You can go the "bare metal" if you need performance and not database portability.
I really don't see what is so bad about that.
The disadvantage of using the specific api's? Try switching databases and watch the chaos ensue:)
Of course! Why do you think PEAR::DB and ADOBD (and Metabase) exist. You can always just use the ODBC functions, too.
What makes it worse is they are trying to make it more OO by re-inventing the wheel.
How so? There OO layer was pretty much stapled onto their existing design but I don't consider that reinventing the wheel.
If they used an OO language underneath, they can make it more OO like.
PHP5 (which has been released in beta form and has been in development for a long time) will have a much more sane OO model that will be familiar to anyone who has used Java or C++.
PHP always acted like a complete hack of a language vs something that was engineered.
Definately. The low-level foundation of PHP has been constantly improving. I suspect there is alot of engineering in there. But PHP provides only a thin layer on top of other open-source technologies..
Look at the database layer? No common functionality.
Yeah, that's cause it's not a database layer. The database API is the one exposed by the database client library. Every API is different because every database vendor does something different. This is not the fault of PHP. Most languages FORCE you to go through some kind of abstraction (Microsoft has ADO and ODBC) which just does exactly what PEAR::DB does.
But if you only use one DB type, or need some special functionality of the API, then for best performance and compatibility you'll want to use those base APIs.
Pear is cool and all, but by making the old calls avail, you allow users to still shoot themselves in the foot.
I for one don't use PEAR::DB. I have my own database abstraction for my own projects which, of course, makes direct calls to the database. So I'm happy for the ability. (Same goes for the other API's as well)
You can't shoot yourself in the foot using the database-specific API's.
Like yourself, I have uninstalled and reinstalled many version of Mozilla. All unsatisfactory.
However, I just recently downloaded 0.9.9 (what everyone is ranting and raving about -- incase you want to check version numbers) and it's very sweet.
I find it fast at openning windows, and very fast at rendering pages (faster than IE). The startup is slower than IE, but then I'm not using the turbo switch yet.
I'm running it on Windows 2000 w/ a 400mhz AMD processor and 384MB of RAM. (Except for the RAM, its a modest machine -- and even the RAM is pretty modest these days).
I'm actually considering switching to Mozilla from IE for my standard browsing -- I never thought I'd say that!
ahem. what was NT for? sometimes, you just have to come to terms with the fact that as tested, bug-fixed and studied as a chunk of code may be, it was developed as part of a misconceived model of either visible functionality or internal architecture or both. DOS and its progeny like win32 were clearly cases of this, and MS weathered a complete rewrite c/o cutler and co. quite happily. the fact that there are examples of disastrous complete rewrites doesn't mean that the examples that worked are meaningless.
Ah yes. But Microsoft also continued developing the Windows 3.x legacy (Win95, Win98, and WinME). Do you think they would have made it anywhere if they released WinNT to the desktop after Win3.1? Probably not. It's taken them 6 long years to get NT technology to the desktop and all that time there were selling DOS-based, 3.1-based operating systems. Definately a smart move and not something that other companies, when doing complete rewrites, think of.
Slashdot Mirror
How would that work? The TRIM command is what tells the drive a particular block is garbage.
Just right-clicking into the blank space of the folder you're in will give you the context menu for that folder.
Leave it up to PHP to introduce nuances in every aspect of the language.
This change brings PHP in line with just about every other object-oriented language on in existence. So it's hardly a nuance.
The revolution is not a next-gen console.. it's a +0.5 gen console. Almost by that definition it's got a lower lifespan than either the Xbox or PS3.
Why would anyone by the Revolution as a second console if they can just buy the controller for their existing console?!? The revolution will have games to begin with but if the controller is available for the other consoles than 3rd parties will have no trouble porting their games over.
Sony and Microsoft have plenty of time to see what happens with the controller and copy it if necessary. Hell, I would expect 3rd party controller makers to copy it pretty quickly.
Two words: Dual Shock.
The orginal playstation control did not have analog sticks. Sony sees the need (in response to Nintendo's N64 controller) and it becomes a wide success on that platform.
Easy.
...Sony and Microsoft will copy it immediately. And that will leave the Revolution where, exactly?
Actually, the ACLU have defended many Christians (and others) who have been prevented from expressing their religion. That too is a civil liberty.
Unfortunately, you've been mislead that the ACLU is some religious hating organization -- that's patently false.
Make your TV-OUT the primary display and then the DVD will play on it and the DVD on the laptop screen will be replaced by a blue screen.
It's a limitation of the hardware, not DRM.
Time travel was used to good effect in Babylon 5. They even had part of the time travel arc in the 1st season and revisited it, in the other timeframe, in the 3rd(?) season.
That single instance of time travel was an essential element to the entire mythology of Babylon 5. StarTrek, of course, uses it as a cheap plot gimic.
From what I've seen, people who use MySQL rarely have a good understanding of even the fundamentals of normalization, joins (all types), the difference between WHERE and HAVING, etc. -- stored procedures, constraints, domains, triggers, etc. are just entirely lost on them. They might start to see some benefits to another server system when they run into the quirks of MySQL (and particularly its data-integrity issues, silent conversions, "transactions", etc.)
That's funny, I generally find the opposite. Because you don't have triggers (especially), constraints, etc you have to do better with your data normalization. I'm working on a SQL server project right now with little or no normalization but lots of triggers to sort it out. What a mess. You couldn't even do that with MySQL. I won't even get into the ugliness of 1500 stored procedures.
That's with the main battery and the bay battery with a reasonable screen brightness and average use.
I can actually get through 2 DVD's stored on the harddrive before the battery dies.
It's not the speediest laptop (900mhz transmeta crueso) but it's nice and small and portable.
PHP5 does not lose the Bash-like advantages of the language.
For purely procedural code, PHP5 is EXACTLY the same as PHP4. The only changes have been in object-oriented side of things. And even most of those changes are optional.
Furthermore, the OO changes to PHP5 bring it in-line with other languages. Ultimately it should make it easier for developers familiar with OO programming to get into PHP.
You're forgetting the HP OmniGo line of organizers. Both the 100 and 120 ran GEOS. It also had Palm graffiti software. And it came out just before the first palm pilot.
It was a great little device with a keyboard and fold-around screen.
Not quite...
"I am concerned about long-term entrenched confusions such as referring to a version of our GNU OS as 'Linux' and thinking that our work on free software was motivated by the ideas associated with 'open source.' These confusions lead users away from the basic issue: their freedom. By comparison, the events involving SCO are transitory and almost trivial," Stallman says.
+5 points for Microsoft Natural Keyboard
-2 points 'cause it's the newer diamond keypad version.
Also, if anyone knows of any projects (with source available) written in PHP that are designed well, I would be interested to hear of them.
Check out Binarycloud
I looked at a tiny bit of PHPMyAdmin's code just for kicks and was horrified. But that's not a valid judgement by any means.
Most open source code (be it C or PHP) is absolutely terrible. PHPMyAdmin is not a good example of well designed PHP code.
Many of your complaints about PHP have been corrected in PHP5 -- you might be interested in checking it out.
Prepare to dump ICQ!
Get Miranda it's interface is similar to ICQ (but way less busy). It can import all your ICQ history and contacts. It's far less bloated. You can download sounds and icon sets to make look/feel exactly like ICQ (which is what I've done).
I also have the MSN plugin installed so I can chat with MSN people.
I was a hardcode ICQ user but Miranda is the ultimate replacement.
PHP has reflection...
An entire chapter in the manual for it.
RMS would like us to say the GNU kernel is called Linux. That's the way it should be but RMS doesn't want Linux to be kernel for GNU (they want HURD) so you can't even say that.
So there are two reasons the DB vendors API's are exposed in PHP:
1) You can write your own DB abstraction layer.
2) You can go the "bare metal" if you need performance and not database portability.
I really don't see what is so bad about that. Of course! Why do you think PEAR::DB and ADOBD (and Metabase) exist. You can always just use the ODBC functions, too.
Like yourself, I have uninstalled and reinstalled many version of Mozilla. All unsatisfactory.
However, I just recently downloaded 0.9.9 (what everyone is ranting and raving about -- incase you want to check version numbers) and it's very sweet.
I find it fast at openning windows, and very fast at rendering pages (faster than IE). The startup is slower than IE, but then I'm not using the turbo switch yet.
I'm running it on Windows 2000 w/ a 400mhz AMD processor and 384MB of RAM. (Except for the RAM, its a modest machine -- and even the RAM is pretty modest these days).
I'm actually considering switching to Mozilla from IE for my standard browsing -- I never thought I'd say that!
ahem. what was NT for? sometimes, you just have to come to terms with the fact that as tested, bug-fixed and studied as a chunk of code may be, it was developed as part of a misconceived model of either visible functionality or internal architecture or both. DOS and its progeny like win32 were clearly cases of this, and MS weathered a complete rewrite c/o cutler and co. quite happily. the fact that there are examples of disastrous complete rewrites doesn't mean that the examples that worked are meaningless.
Ah yes. But Microsoft also continued developing the Windows 3.x legacy (Win95, Win98, and WinME). Do you think they would have made it anywhere if they released WinNT to the desktop after Win3.1? Probably not. It's taken them 6 long years to get NT technology to the desktop and all that time there were selling DOS-based, 3.1-based operating systems. Definately a smart move and not something that other companies, when doing complete rewrites, think of.
You miss the point. The browser supports CSS, it just does it so badly that a properly coded site comes out looking like hell.
My company codes all our sites for 4.x browsers and up but we serve a different CSS to Netscape 4 for this reason.